Iain Wright: The Government's intention is always to keep the House informed. The hon. Gentleman raised serious questions about roll-out and related detailed issues. I can confirm that the average time taken to produce a HIP in September was 45 days and that the average cost of the HIP was, in contrast to the Conservative party's scaremongering figure of £1,000, only £300 to £350 plus VAT. More than 102,000 energy performance certificates have been lodged since 1 August and the average time taken to produce an EPC is between 2.5 and 4 days.
	The whole House will accept that the knowledge of my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich in this area of policy is second to none, and I pay tribute to his articulate speech tonight. He mentioned how inefficient, archaic and often duplicatory procedures were costing customers £1 million a day. He knows that home buyers and sellers have repeatedly stated that they find the process confusing, stressful and opaque. That point was also well made by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Betts).
	Many people complain about the lack of information on what is probably one of the biggest transactions of their lives. HIPs have rightly been seen as a first step in the process of reform. They provide an opportunity to improve the lot of home buyers and sellers. They are bringing greater transparency and competition into home buying and selling and, for the first time, energy ratings on homes are part of the energy performance certificate.
	I greatly enjoyed the contribution of the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Mr. Liddell-Grainger), who is a real gentleman and an accountant. We do not have enough accountants in the House, in my opinion. He said that the whole process was, if I quote him correctly, sneaked out, but that clearly was not right. In her statement to Parliament on 22 May, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, West (Ruth Kelly), then Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, announced that the start date for home information packs would be 1 August and said:
	"We will extend to smaller properties as rapidly as possible, as sufficient energy assessors become ready to work. As we see the number of accredited assessors rise, so more properties will be included in the system."—[ Official Report, 22 May 2007; Vol. 460, c. 1108.]
	The decision set out in August therefore implemented that parliamentary announcement. Revised regulations were also laid before Parliament on 11 June, following the commencement order for four-bedroom property sales on 8 June. We also published a statement on 11 June setting out the details of the implementation proposals. It is therefore simply untrue to say that the process was sneaked out.
	The hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) made some extremely fine points, and made good use of his experience on the 2003 Housing Bill Committee. I disagreed with almost everything he said, but he said it beautifully and with eloquence. His contribution improved the quality of the debate. His point about existing housing stock that is not in the market was pertinent and well made. I would like to reflect further on that and discuss it with colleagues. If I have time, I shall mention related points later. His point about local authority involvement in producing some sort of energy rating is somewhat at odds with the position of Conservative Front Benchers, but I welcome his contribution.
	I find it astonishing that something as important as energy performance certificates merited seven words in the Opposition's motion, and that hardly any Opposition Member mentioned the importance of EPCs, with the exception of the hon. Members for Bridgwater and for Rochford and Southend, East (James Duddridge). In an intervention, the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Mr. Goodwill) suggested that people could use gas bills to cut carbon emissions. I admire and like the hon. Gentleman, who has close links with Hartlepool, but I found his comments extremely complacent. Ed Matthew, Friends of the Earth climate campaigner, has said:
	"The Government is to be warmly congratulated for keeping its nerve and expanding the adoption of Energy Performance Certificates. Critics would do well to remember that without them there is absolutely no hope of making significant progress on low-carbon homes and tackling climate change. This is not red tape but real information that will help people to find out what they can do to make their homes energy-efficient."
	That quote is backed up by the evidence and expectations of real people. YouGov research confirms that our approach is right: 71 per cent. of people want more information about the energy efficiency of the home they are buying; 77 per cent. said that it would influence their decision to buy; and nearly half, 47 per cent., said that they would make their home more energy efficient if they had more information. If only one fifth of homeowners made the basic changes set out in their EPC, they could save about £100 million a year on their energy bills, and cut carbon emissions equivalent to taking 100,000 cars off the road. That is precisely why all the green groups agree that HIPs with EPCs will help families to cut their fuel bills and help to reduce the 27 per cent. of carbon emissions that come from our homes. The Conservative party does not seem to agree, however, and I am disappointed by that.
	My hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Andrew Miller) made a great speech, standing up for businesses in his constituency, and there is nothing wrong with that. He highlighted the importance of employment and the need to reduce costs in the home-buying process.
	Interestingly, the hon. Member for Broxbourne advocated an 11-month parliamentary recess. He praised the current housing market, which is largely a result of the decade of economic stability presided over by this Government. He seemed to forget that bit. He also failed to mention the negative equity, 15 per cent. interest rates and record repossessions—